Perplexity AI Offers Google $34.5 Bn For Chrome Browser
The whopping sum proposed in a letter of intent by Perplexity is nearly double the value of the startup, which was reportedly $18 billion in a recent funding round.
"This proposal is designed to satisfy an antitrust remedy in highest public interest by placing Chrome with a capable, independent operator focused on continuity, openness, and consumer protection," Perplexity chief executive Aravind Srinivas said in the letter, a copy of which was seen by AFP.
Google is awaiting US District Court Judge Amit Mehta's ruling on what "remedies" to impose, following a landmark decision last year that said the tech titan maintained an illegal monopoly in online search.
US government attorneys have called for Google to divest itself of the Chrome browser, contending that artificial intelligence is poised to ramp up the tech giant's dominance as the go-to window into the internet.
Google has urged Mehta to reject the divestment, and his decision is expected by the end of the month.
Google did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Perplexity's offer vastly undervalues Chrome and "should not be taken seriously," Baird Equity Research analysts said in a note to investors.
Given that Perplexity already has a browser that competes with Chrome, the San Francisco-based startup could be trying to spark others to bid or "influence the pending decision" in the antitrust case, Baird analysts theorized.
"Either way, we believe Perplexity would view an independent Chrome -- or one no longer affiliated with Google -- as an advantage as it attempts to take browser share," Baird analysts told investors.
Google contends that the United States has gone way beyond the scope of the suit by recommending a spinoff of Chrome, and holding open the option to force a sale of its Android mobile operating system.
"Forcing the sale of Chrome or banning default agreements wouldn't foster competition," said Cato Institute senior fellow in technology policy Jennifer Huddleston.
"It would hobble innovation, hurt smaller players, and leave users with worse products."
Google attorney John Schmidtlein noted in court that more than 80 percent of Chrome users are outside the United States, meaning divestiture would have global ramifications.
"Any divested Chrome would be a shadow of the current Chrome," he contended.
"And once we are in that world, I don't see how you can say anybody is better off."
The potential of Chrome being weakened or spun off comes as rivals such as Microsoft, ChatGPT and Perplexity put generative artificial intelligence (AI) to work fetching information from the internet in response to user queries.
Google is among the tech companies investing heavily to be a leader in AI, and is weaving the technology into search and other online offerings.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Int'l Business Times
17 hours ago
- Int'l Business Times
India Reels From US Tariff Hike Threat
Indian exporters are scrambling for options to mitigate the fallout of US President Donald Trump's threatened tariff salvo against the world's most populous nation. Many warn of dire job losses after Trump said he would double new import tariffs from 25 percent to 50 percent if India continues to buy Russian oil, in a bid to strip Moscow of revenue for its military offensive in Ukraine. "At 50 percent tariff, no product from India can stand any competitive edge," said economist Garima Kapoor from Elara Securities. India, one of the world's largest crude oil importers, has until August 27 to find alternatives to replace around a third of its current oil supply from abroad. While New Delhi is not an export powerhouse, it shipped goods worth about $87 billion to the United States in 2024. That 50 percent levy now threatens to upend low-margin, labour-intensive industries ranging from gems and jewellery to textiles and seafood. The Global Trade Research Initiative estimates a potential 60 percent drop in US sales in 2025 in sectors such as garments. Exporters say they are racing to fulfil orders before the deadline. "Whatever we can ship before August 27, we are shipping," said Vijay Kumar Agarwal, chairman of Creative Group. The Mumbai-based textile and garment exporter has a nearly 80 percent exposure to the US market. But Agarwal warned that is merely triage. Shipping goods before the deadline "doesn't solve" the problem, he said. "If it doesn't get resolved, there will be chaos," he said, adding that he's worried for the future of his 15,000 to 16,000 employees. "It is a very gloomy situation... it will be an immense loss of business." Talks to resolve the matter hinge on geopolitics, far from the reach of business. Trump is set to meet Vladimir Putin on Friday, the first face-to-face meeting between the two countries' presidents since Russia launched its full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. New Delhi, with longstanding ties with Moscow, is in a delicate situation. Since Trump's tariff threats, Prime Minister Narendra Modi has spoken to both Putin and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, urging a "peaceful resolution" to the conflict. Meanwhile, the US tariff impact is already being felt in India. Businesses say fresh orders from some US buyers have begun drying up -- threatening millions of dollars in future business and the livelihoods of hundreds of thousands in the world's fifth biggest economy. Among India's biggest apparel makers with global manufacturing operations, some are looking to move their US orders elsewhere. Top exporter Pearl Global Industries has told Indian media that some of its US customers asked that orders be produced in lower-duty countries such as Vietnam or Bangladesh, where the company also has manufacturing facilities. Major apparel maker Gokaldas Exports told Bloomberg it may boost production in Ethiopia and Kenya, which have a 10 percent tariff. Moody's recently warned that for India, the "much wider tariff gap" may "even reverse some of the gains made in recent years in attracting related investments". India's gems and jewellery industry exported goods worth more than $10 billion last year and employs hundreds of thousands of people. "Nothing is happening now, everything is at a standstill, new orders have been put on hold," Ajesh Mehta from D. Navinchandra Exports told AFP. "We expect up to 150,000 to 200,000 workers to be impacted." Gems, and other expensive non-essential items, are vulnerable. "A 10 percent tariff was absorbable -- 25 percent is not, let alone this 50 percent," Mehta added. "At the end of the day, we deal in luxury products. When the cost goes up beyond a point, customers will cut back." Seafood exporters, who have been told by some US buyers to hold shipments, are hoping for new customers. "We are looking to diversify our markets," says Alex Ninan, who is a partner at the Baby Marine Group. "The United States is totally out right now. We will have to push our products to alternative markets, such as China, Japan... Russia is another market we are really looking into." Ninan, however, warns that is far from simple. "You can't create a market all of a sudden," he said. A person stands in a supermarket in the 'Little India' neighborhood of New York City AFP Indian businesses say fresh orders from some US buyers have begun drying up -- threatening millions of dollars in future business and the livelihoods of hundreds of thousands in the world's fifth biggest economy AFP Jewelry is on display at a store in the 'Little India' neighborhood of New York City AFP Among India's biggest apparel makers with global manufacturing operations, some are looking to move their US orders elsewhere AFP Seafood exporters, who have been told by some US buyers to hold shipments, are hoping for new customers AFP
Int'l Business Times
21 hours ago
- Int'l Business Times
'Stop Production': Small US Firms Battered By Shifting Tariffs
When US President Donald Trump announced tariffs on almost all trading partners in April, Ben Knepler contacted the factory in Cambodia producing his company's outdoor furniture. "Stop production," he ordered. The announcement involved a 10-percent levy on imports from most partners, set to rise further for many of them. For Cambodia, the planned duty was a staggering 49 percent. "That night, we spoke to our factory," Knepler told AFP. "We literally cannot afford to bring our own product into the US with that kind of tariff." The decision was even more painful for Knepler and his Pennsylvania-based company, True Places, given that he had previously shifted production of his outdoor chairs to Cambodia from China, following tariffs on Chinese imports imposed by Trump during his first presidency. "We were facing 25-percent tariffs in China, and there were zero-percent tariffs in Cambodia," Knepler recalled. It took him a year to move the massive equipment and molds to Cambodia only to see another steep levy. With Trump's "reciprocal" tariff hikes taking effect last Thursday, these Cambodia-made chairs face a lower -- though still significant -- 19 percent duty. Knepler's experience echoes that of many US companies producing everything from yo-yos to clothing abroad, after years of offshoring American manufacturing. To cope, businesses use various strategies. Some pass on the new costs as a surcharge to customers. Others halted imports when duties reached prohibitive levels, hoping Trump would strike bilateral trade deals that would make their businesses viable again. Trump frames his tariffs as paid for by other countries, touting tens of billions in revenue this year -- but firms contest this description. "We make the tariff payments when the product comes into the US," Knepler stressed. "Before we sell it, we're the ones who pay that tariff." Now saddled with hundreds of thousands of dollars in debt he took on to relocate the company's production to Cambodia, Knepler worries if his business will survive. He likens the rapid policy changes to spinning a "wheel of misfortune," resulting in a new tariff each time. Over four months this year, the planned tariff rate on Cambodian exports has gone from 0 to 49 percent, to 10 percent, to 36 percent, to 19 percent, he said. "No one knows what it's going to be tomorrow," he added. "It's impossible to have any kind of confidence in what the rate will be in three- or four-months' time." Economists warn that tariffs could fuel inflation and drag on growth. EY chief economist Gregory Daco noted that the duties effective Thursday raise the average tariff rate to 17.6 percent from 2.8 percent at the start of the year --- the highest level since the early 1930s. While Trump lauds the limited effects his duties have had on US prices so far, experts say tariffs take time to filter through to consumers. Many of Trump's sweeping levies also face legal challenges over his use of emergency economic powers. The global tariffs are especially hard to avoid. Barton O'Brien said he accelerated production and borrowed money to bring in as much inventory as possible before Trump took office. On the election campaign trail, the Republican leader had floated a 60-percent tariff on imports from China, where O'Brien makes most of his products. The Maryland-based veteran selling dog harnesses and other accessories rented a container to ship as many products as he could before Trump's new tariffs would take effect. "I had dog life jackets in the bathroom," he told AFP. There is "no way" to produce domestically, he said, adding that comparable American-made products sell for nearly six times his retail prices. He makes some items too in India and Vietnam. But Chinese products face an additional 30-percent duty this year, even under an extended truce now expiring in November. The rates for India and Vietnam are 25 percent and 20 percent respectively. "If you look at the brands I compete with, we're all made in the same countries. We're all going to have to raise prices together," said O'Brien. US companies producing everything from yo-yos to clothing abroad are coping with a variety of strategies AFP
Int'l Business Times
a day ago
- Int'l Business Times
Perplexity AI Offers Google $34.5 Bn For Chrome Browser
Perplexity AI offered Google on Tuesday $34.5 billion for its popular Chrome web browser, which the internet giant could potentially be forced to sell as part of antitrust proceedings. The whopping sum proposed in a letter of intent by Perplexity is nearly double the value of the startup, which was reportedly $18 billion in a recent funding round. "This proposal is designed to satisfy an antitrust remedy in highest public interest by placing Chrome with a capable, independent operator focused on continuity, openness, and consumer protection," Perplexity chief executive Aravind Srinivas said in the letter, a copy of which was seen by AFP. Google is awaiting US District Court Judge Amit Mehta's ruling on what "remedies" to impose, following a landmark decision last year that said the tech titan maintained an illegal monopoly in online search. US government attorneys have called for Google to divest itself of the Chrome browser, contending that artificial intelligence is poised to ramp up the tech giant's dominance as the go-to window into the internet. Google has urged Mehta to reject the divestment, and his decision is expected by the end of the month. Google did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Perplexity's offer vastly undervalues Chrome and "should not be taken seriously," Baird Equity Research analysts said in a note to investors. Given that Perplexity already has a browser that competes with Chrome, the San Francisco-based startup could be trying to spark others to bid or "influence the pending decision" in the antitrust case, Baird analysts theorized. "Either way, we believe Perplexity would view an independent Chrome -- or one no longer affiliated with Google -- as an advantage as it attempts to take browser share," Baird analysts told investors. Google contends that the United States has gone way beyond the scope of the suit by recommending a spinoff of Chrome, and holding open the option to force a sale of its Android mobile operating system. "Forcing the sale of Chrome or banning default agreements wouldn't foster competition," said Cato Institute senior fellow in technology policy Jennifer Huddleston. "It would hobble innovation, hurt smaller players, and leave users with worse products." Google attorney John Schmidtlein noted in court that more than 80 percent of Chrome users are outside the United States, meaning divestiture would have global ramifications. "Any divested Chrome would be a shadow of the current Chrome," he contended. "And once we are in that world, I don't see how you can say anybody is better off." The potential of Chrome being weakened or spun off comes as rivals such as Microsoft, ChatGPT and Perplexity put generative artificial intelligence (AI) to work fetching information from the internet in response to user queries. Google is among the tech companies investing heavily to be a leader in AI, and is weaving the technology into search and other online offerings.
